Is your hipster cred waning? Having trouble keeping up with the indie scene? Getting bored of the same old "mainstream" indie and looking for some new candles? Or are you just really pretentious and want to be the most obscure kid on the bloc?
If you answered yes to any of these questions or picked up on the dcfc/bloc party references then here's a hobby I would suggest for you:
Sign up on last.fm and start viewing the Users section for random countries, view the foreigners' pages, and write down a bunch of bands you've never heard of. Now search for those bands or artists on last.fm and listen to their similar artist radio. You can't really get much more obscure than that (information really DOES travel faster...). Reference some lyrics or artists that interest you at your next "coffee of doom" visit or to your hipster posse and watch your indie cred sky rocket.
New Hobby: search random countries on last.fm to discover new bands
Band Evolution
I was reading up on the Dire Strait's history on wikipedia and listening to "Romeo and Juliet" and I noticed their member list was quite diverse. Subsequently the question came to my mind, "At what point is a band not the same because of shifting members?" In the Dire Straits example it's not too drastic because they did keep the lead singer(Mark Knopfler) and bassist(John Illsey) but at the same time the other two to four members over the years altered regularly. They might play the same songs and try to imitate the style but the real feeling of a musical group is with its soul members. When the members are switching around ever year or so can you really say you enjoy the Dire Straits or did you just enjoy the Dire Straits during their 1982-1984 era? Personally, I don't think a band should rightfully retain the name if it's not the true heart and soul of the group or the founding members. Realistically they can't just decided to change their name when they've gotten considerable success but I don't think they can really be considered that band without at least mostly original members so they retain that real emotion that the creator put into it. Maybe nothing can really change, it's a fact of life musicians move around and find other opportunities or have needs they need to fill and it's understandable, it just doesn't seem right to refer to a band as the same name when the current members barely resemble their predecessors ten years prior.
Stop stereotyping! You're not indie!
I've been dawning on this kind of realization that what I'm searching for isn't really getting my "hipster cred" and hanging out with my "indie" friends. Stereotypes aside, what really embodies the concept of "indie" has gone beyond alternative rock music. You could classify it by the hipster/scenester crowd and groups like Flaming Lips and Bloc Party but that's really only breaking the surface; that's really only the people who are either "posers" (god forbid we CALL them that) or the people that can't find or don't want a place in established mainstream groups so they discover these unknown bands and wear out-there clothes which eventually TURNS THEM INTO the stereotype of "hipster" and it's accepted.
In my view trying to be really Indie has nothing to do with that mindset. It's more of a longing to find those unique ideas that don't really get out into the world and interpreting and maybe promoting them yourself, going beyond just hipster music and fashion and encompassing the non-mainstream art, literature, films, opinions on current events, personal stories, and on occasion really out there concepts of fashion and design, all from the present and the past.
The problem with this is many people, like the hypocritical stereotype mafia, pretentiously oppose the stereotypes and reject anyone who LOOKS like they're taking up a specific stereotype. The problem with that is two fold: 1. these people who oppose stereotypes are essentially perpetuating them by acknowledging and opposing their existence 2. there's no way to AVOID these stereotypes anymore because they encompass just about everything sold. We are a society reared on capitalism and the sales managers of the world know it, they market everything based on specific demographics. The hippies have their food and clothing, the preps have their A&F and Hollister, emos and goths have hot topic, hipsters have their thrift stores and EBTM, so now no matter what you buy, wear, or listen to you're being entered into a stereotype whether purposely or accidentally.
In that strive to feel independent from the general views we seek out these strange ideas BECAUSE in every day life there's no escape from stereotypes. We're not TRYING to find our cliche, we're trying to find our own niche. That spot where we can feel comfortably accepted, viewed based on our personality and not our clothing store, and not constantly oppressed by that metaphorical stereotype mafia. Perhaps there is no more independent group, everything in existence has been classified, there is no such thing as miscellaneous and the only way to look unique is to change yourself and adapt day by day and, most importantly, to shake things up every once in awhile, oppose the norm, and express a new side to every thought process.
The Path of Humankind
I recently spilled a bag of packaging peanuts that was in my room and the little foam objects went everywhere, hundreds of them. I thought to myself, "What is the use of these things? They don't accomplish anything REALLY(or at least that something much better couldn't do), they destroy the environment by sitting in landfills and getting eaten by small animals, and they're a general pain in the ass. So why did we invent them? The only answer to THAT question that I can think of is for the sake of progress.
Humankind has this false idea that they NEED to use their intellect to invent things and try to make life "easier" when all they're really doing is setting themselves on a path for their demise and making life more complicated. We create things like cars, moving floors, and packaging peanuts in the hope that we can look smart and productive or to make our lives "easier" but with everything that "improves" our lives you create one more thing that can break, and one more reason to be lazy. Besides that, the fuels we use to power our pointless inventions are debatably fogging our atmosphere and creating acid rain that destroys environments and monuments and could be heating our planet to the point where species are dying. The worst part is scientists give us this terrible idea that it would be a waste to NOT use our intellect because it will set us back to the primates.
It all started with the Enlightenment, questioning ideas and discovering sciences that produced the bells and whistles that are the present day machina. Even before that our nomadic ancestors decided to dabble in agriculture that sent us on the path to our eminent demise. As soon as we settled down and lost the need to move and hunt we started thinking and here we are today. Being controlled by falsely represented governments, fighting over damned abstract ideas of religion, and backwardly combating societal laziness.
To top that off, we're pouring glucose and corn syrup into our foods, drinking our alcohol, and smoking until our lungs fall off. Now we're consuming things that erode our bodies, using fuels and technology by the truck load that cause cancer and disease, and spend most of our time sitting on the coach staring at a flashing screen. We gain weight, lose energy, and fall into a capitalism induced stupor.
Then the physically and mentally incapacitated populace force their children into what LOOKS like a strong education supporting creativity and intellect when really they're dropping us in a controlled, conformist environment that promotes darwinian ideologies of survival of the fittest. We're divided by age and ability into classrooms controlled by a single puppet of the government that's pouring rhetoric and forcing obedience into our heads.
If we choose to accept this and try hard in the false system that our forefathers created then we make life the best we can for ourselves and become the stimulant that continues that false progress towards the degenerating technological breakthroughs. Or, if we so choose, we can do whats best for society and avoid that path of self destruction, push away the ideas that are being fed us and find our own way in life. We probably won't get far but at least we're not creating those self-destructive technologies. But then again all those selfish, greedy, short-sited folks that DO decide to take that path are going to destroy society ANYWAYS so we'll be gone too.
So in closing, to quote one of the greatest men I've ever heard, next time you have a thought...let it pass.
a real good life
after the renaissance, logic and "free thinking" have overcome just about every control society has had on the world. weve formed governments that represent the people, weve made life easier with technology, and created the middle class all of which made life "better" in most concrete aspects. but with the "improvements" came the dangers of powerful technology and eventually weaponry. besides that, capitalist empires have gotten our "representative" governments in a strangle-hold where they're no better than a socialist ideology with puppets for presidents. our political leaders dont listen to the populace, markets are becoming sudo-monopolies uncontrollable by the buyers, and institutions like the public education system create a linear lifestyle that puts a price tag on the "american dream." weve created a society where everything has a price and life is still a matter of survival. after thousands of years of societal growth, war, and reform we have improved nothing. for most there isnt a point in life where work stops and you begin enjoying life, its simply everyones goal to survive, make their own small fortune, and eventually improve through reproduction. the only improvement weve accomplished since the dark ages is in medicine. wars are just as terrible, life is just as hard, and governments just as oppressive.
which brings up the question: whats better, the simple, pious, agrarian life of the 1500s or the complex, capitalist empire that is the present day?